Agrega una trama en tu idiomaStruggling writer Wally Spivak is stuck in a rut--until he meets an engaged couple and starts to see life in a whole new way.Struggling writer Wally Spivak is stuck in a rut--until he meets an engaged couple and starts to see life in a whole new way.Struggling writer Wally Spivak is stuck in a rut--until he meets an engaged couple and starts to see life in a whole new way.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
Jenna Lyng Adams
- Woman at Elysian
- (as Jenna Lyng)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
A friend of mine told me to check out Spivak and, after a bit of hesitation, I decided to give it a try. I was really surprised! The movie is so charming, off-beat, smart, and unpredictable. The story is about this really bad unpublished writer who suffers through life around Los Angeles amidst these crazy characters who all try to help him even when he doesn't want to be helped. The grumpy guy who plays Spivak turns out to be pretty adorable, but the peripheral performances steal the show. The British guy who plays the golf pro Chuck gives a great performance as a jock who dreams of being an intellectual. Michael Cera has a small supporting part as Spivak's successful adversary. He's pretty funny in here as well. Anyway, I really recommend this movie. It's fun!
Offbeat, small budget rom-com starring Chris Kattan's vestigal twin. While cloyingly eccentric, the main plot is time-worn and used up. Insecure, blocked-up writer with a permanent "constipation-face" meets woman (who in reality would never give him the time of day) in an unlikely fashion. She's engaged to a studly, dim-bulb golf pro. Wacky hijinks ensue, rocketing to a predictable conclusion. No belly laughs, but nothing objectionable either. I thought of two endings that could've made this stand out a bit more, but a happy ending must be more bankable. Unfortunately, the ending destroys the quirky ambiance.
Spivak is a tiny ugly man who is constantly humiliated by life. His only ambition, to be a writer, is thwarted by his biggest critic: himself, as he writes and rewrites the same novel, to the cruel delight of the mean people around him. Single on a Valentine's Day, he is suddenly approached by a gorgeous girl who asks him to spend the night with her. This changes his life, to his great chagrin and ultimately delight, transforming him from a hateful frustrated little man into a relaxed and positive success.
I liked the way it was played. I have to say most of the scenes were really painful, as the actors all did very well and you could understand the main character's confusion, fear, shame and pain. The moral of the story has to be that you're doing it to yourself, as a bunch of beautiful rich people attempt again and again to make his life better, while he just fears that he doesn't deserve it.
While Michael Bacall did great as the titular character, I would say that most of the movie was carried by Robert Kazinsky's Chuck, a guy so sickeningly positive that you can't but doubt his good honest intentions. It's a strange movie to see. If Spivak wasn't so monstrously unlovable, the movie would have been more credible and easier to swallow. As such, I can only perceive it as a writer's dream, free of all pretenses. Or maybe that's my inner frustrated little man, unable to accept the possible beauty of the world. You decide, as you watch the film. It provides more questions than answers, and that's the whole point.
I liked the way it was played. I have to say most of the scenes were really painful, as the actors all did very well and you could understand the main character's confusion, fear, shame and pain. The moral of the story has to be that you're doing it to yourself, as a bunch of beautiful rich people attempt again and again to make his life better, while he just fears that he doesn't deserve it.
While Michael Bacall did great as the titular character, I would say that most of the movie was carried by Robert Kazinsky's Chuck, a guy so sickeningly positive that you can't but doubt his good honest intentions. It's a strange movie to see. If Spivak wasn't so monstrously unlovable, the movie would have been more credible and easier to swallow. As such, I can only perceive it as a writer's dream, free of all pretenses. Or maybe that's my inner frustrated little man, unable to accept the possible beauty of the world. You decide, as you watch the film. It provides more questions than answers, and that's the whole point.
The main character is frustrating to watch.... self pity, aimless, losing attitude.... until slowly but surely his life turns around when he meets people completely at the other end of life spectrum !
But I can't stop letting it run here on my computer. Something pleasant (but totally unbelievable) has to happen.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaRobert Kazinsky and Bradley Dodds play brothers in this movie. While Bradley Dodds had previously played a fairy on the HBO series True Blood (2008), Robert Kazinsky had previously played a vampire-fairy hybrid on that same series.
- ErroresThe camera is reflected on the hotel window, where Wally is.
- Bandas sonorasNocturne No. 2 in E-Flat Minor, Op. 9 No.2
Written by Frédéric Chopin (as Frederick Chopin)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Spivak?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Спивак
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 1,000,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 31min(91 min)
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta